dave_olker at hp.com
Fri Jul 28 17:17:27 GMT 2000
Peter Polkinghorne wrote:
> Sorry for not responding to your initial post - I did have a look at it, but
> was concerned at volume of data when turning up logging level to 3.
> Not sure what the best solution is ...
Me either... I'll copy samba-technical in case anyone else has some
great ideas for this.
I initially designed the CIFSSTAT tool so that no code changes would be
necessary to the samba code. Unfortunately, as you found, when logging
level is set to 3 not only do we log tons of data but throughput
performance roughly drops in half.
My thinking on this was that a customer would normally leave their
logging level at 0 or 1 until a problem arose. If a problem came up we
could have them bump up the logging level to 3 and use CIFSSTAT to
measure what is going on. Of course, if the problem they are having is
performance related then increasing the logging level is probably the
Perhaps we need to think about modifying the samba code to allow us to
collect some of these metrics without paying the price for increasing
the logging level, i.e. global counters? This could get very tricky to
implement when dealing with 1500+ smbd daemons handling requests.
Perhaps a shared memory type of arrangement?
Anyway, if anyone else has any ideas on how to accomplish this I'd love
to hear them... Also, any feedback on the CIFSSTAT tool itself are
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 376 bytes
Desc: Card for Dave Olker
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20000728/dbb8b017/dave_olker.vcf
More information about the samba-technical